Not only in Dickens. In Illinois case law too:
https://chi.streetsblog.org/2025/02/18/a-new-illinois-bill-would-assert-that-people-on-bikes-are-intended-user-of-every-roadway-in-the-state-where-its-legal-to-ride
With any luck, soon to be rectified.
On 20 Feb 2025 09:19:01 GMT, Roger Merriman <roger@sarlet.com> wrote:
AMuzi <am@yellowjersey.org> wrote:
Not only in Dickens. In Illinois case law too:
https://chi.streetsblog.org/2025/02/18/a-new-illinois-bill-would-assert-that-people-on-bikes-are-intended-user-of-every-roadway-in-the-state-where-its-legal-to-ride
With any luck, soon to be rectified.
Id assume knowing a touch about US Motordom that this was intended rather >> than unexpected outcome, after all the aim was to have a car dependent
society!
Roger Merriman
The wording says "bicycles are to be considered "intended users" of
any roadway where riding is allowed, thereby allowing them to seek
damages."
On 20 Feb 2025 12:26:38 GMT, Roger Merriman <roger@sarlet.com> wrote:
John B. <slocombjb@gmail.com> wrote:
On 20 Feb 2025 09:19:01 GMT, Roger Merriman <roger@sarlet.com> wrote:
AMuzi <am@yellowjersey.org> wrote:
Not only in Dickens. In Illinois case law too:
https://chi.streetsblog.org/2025/02/18/a-new-illinois-bill-would-assert-that-people-on-bikes-are-intended-user-of-every-roadway-in-the-state-where-its-legal-to-ride
With any luck, soon to be rectified.
I?d assume knowing a touch about US Motordom that this was intended rather >>>> than unexpected outcome, after all the aim was to have a car dependent >>>> society!
Roger Merriman
The wording says "bicycles are to be considered "intended users" of
any roadway where riding is allowed, thereby allowing them to seek
damages."
Yes that’s the intended change, vs being permitted to use but not an
intended user of the road!
Which really is a very US or car centric thing!
Note that UK which is far from perfect with cycling and has plenty of car
centric infrastructure, but the Law is much more liberal so a Mandatory
bike lane for example is for motorists ie its Mandatory for them to not
cross over the solid white line.
Cyclists can use or not use it as far as the law applies, some very unwise >> police officer attempting to suggest otherwise resulted in a Court case to >> prove the law in the 1980’s maybe?
From the words used in that single reference, in the U.S. if the road
is being repaired or maintained and you ride a bicycle into the area
being worked on and crash that is the fault of the workers, State,
County, Whatever and if there is a big hole in the road and you hit it
and crash, again it is someone else's fault.
A rather large change from I lived there ,when if a sign had been
erected, "Road Work In Progress" you were expected to have enough
sense to use care so you wouldn't fall and if you didn't then you were
at fault.
AMuzi <am@yellowjersey.org> wrote:
Not only in Dickens. In Illinois case law too:
https://chi.streetsblog.org/2025/02/18/a-new-illinois-bill-would-assert-that-people-on-bikes-are-intended-user-of-every-roadway-in-the-state-where-its-legal-to-ride
With any luck, soon to be rectified.
I?d assume knowing a touch about US Motordom that this was intended rather than unexpected outcome, after all the aim was to have a car dependent society!
John B. <slocombjb@gmail.com> wrote:
On 20 Feb 2025 09:19:01 GMT, Roger Merriman <roger@sarlet.com> wrote:
AMuzi <am@yellowjersey.org> wrote:
Not only in Dickens. In Illinois case law too:
https://chi.streetsblog.org/2025/02/18/a-new-illinois-bill-would-assert-that-people-on-bikes-are-intended-user-of-every-roadway-in-the-state-where-its-legal-to-ride
With any luck, soon to be rectified.
I d assume knowing a touch about US Motordom that this was intended rather
than unexpected outcome, after all the aim was to have a car dependent
society!
Roger Merriman
The wording says "bicycles are to be considered "intended users" of
any roadway where riding is allowed, thereby allowing them to seek damages."
Yes that?s the intended change, vs being permitted to use but not an
intended user of the road!
Which really is a very US or car centric thing!
Note that UK which is far from perfect with cycling and has plenty of car centric infrastructure, but the Law is much more liberal so a Mandatory
bike lane for example is for motorists ie its Mandatory for them to not
cross over the solid white line.
Cyclists can use or not use it as far as the law applies, some very unwise police officer attempting to suggest otherwise resulted in a Court case to prove the law in the 1980?s maybe?
| Sysop: | Keyop |
|---|---|
| Location: | Huddersfield, West Yorkshire, UK |
| Users: | 497 |
| Nodes: | 16 (3 / 13) |
| Uptime: | 02:09:08 |
| Calls: | 9,768 |
| Calls today: | 9 |
| Files: | 13,748 |
| Messages: | 6,186,433 |